Requirement Management for Valve-blocks
Throughout my career in automotive engineering and consulting, I’ve encountered a fair share of requirement management challenges. One of the most striking cases involved the valve block in car seat massage functions—something that seems trivial at first but quickly reveals itself to be a battlefield of technical, regulatory, and strategic maneuvering.
The Two Faces of Requirements
Requirements in automotive engineering fall into two categories:
- Essential Engineering & Safety Requirements – These ensure the component functions correctly, meets durability expectations, and complies with legal regulations. Failure to meet these leads to real safety risks, liability issues, and costly recalls.
- Strategic Roadblocks – These exist purely as negotiation leverage. They are intentionally difficult—sometimes impossible—to meet, allowing OEMs to push suppliers into pricing concessions.
I’ve seen both in action, and understanding the difference is crucial.
What I Learned About Legal and Safety Requirements
Early in my career, I assumed all requirements were there for a reason. But as I worked on complex projects—like integrating seat massage systems into luxury vehicle platforms—I learned that compliance is a non-negotiable aspect of automotive development. Requirements related to overheating prevention, material selection, and endurance testing are necessary to meet ISO standards and protect the end user.
I worked closely with testing teams to validate these specifications and ensure that design decisions didn’t compromise safety. I also learned that regulatory compliance isn’t just about ticking boxes—it’s about engineering responsibility. A missed detail could mean a safety recall that costs millions.
The Reality of Strategic Roadblocks
The first time I encountered ‘unrealistic’ requirements, I thought it was a mistake. A specified tolerance was so extreme that meeting it would have required custom-machined components at an exorbitant cost. That’s when I learned the truth—these weren’t mistakes. They were bargaining chips.
OEMs sometimes introduce excessive requirements knowing that suppliers will fail to meet them. Then, during negotiations, they can say, “Since you didn’t meet all the specs, we need a price reduction.” I’ve sat on the supplier side of the table, dissecting such requirements, preparing counterarguments, and working to expose these tactics.
How I Navigated These Challenges
Over the years, I’ve developed a system for tackling requirement management effectively:
- Question Everything – I no longer take specifications at face value. If something seems excessive, I ask why.
- Engage Early – The worst time to push back on a requirement is late in the process. By identifying issues early, I’ve helped teams avoid unnecessary redesigns and cost overruns.
- Leverage Data, Not Emotion – The best defense against a strategic roadblock is hard data. I’ve used test results, benchmarking studies, and cost breakdowns to challenge unreasonable demands and negotiate better terms.
- Maintain Relationships – While pushing back is necessary, doing it constructively matters. I’ve learned that long-term relationships with OEMs and suppliers are built on trust, and trust comes from demonstrating technical expertise and business awareness.
Final Thoughts
Requirement management in automotive isn’t just about engineering—it’s about strategy. Working on seat massage systems and other vehicle components, I’ve seen firsthand how specifications shape not just product design but entire business negotiations. The key takeaway? Always double-check before committing, because not every requirement is what it seems.